In the sixth part of the feature on AI and the channel, we examined the issue of job losses.
There is a fear that AI could displace workers – particularly those in entry-level jobs. We asked if this is a legitimate concern, and how enterprises can guard against wholesale job losses.
Werner Herbst, MD of First Distribution
It is a valid concern, particularly for roles that are repetitive and task-based.
However, AI is more likely to reshape jobs than eliminate them entirely. As automation increases, there will be greater demand for roles focused on oversight, decision-making, and managing AI-driven systems.
The key is proactive reskilling and ensuring that organisations evolve their workforce alongside technology.
Ravi Bhat, commercial solutions and AI officer at Microsoft South Africa
The concern is legitimate, but the right frame is job redesign, not job displacement. AI should augment people by removing repetitive work and freeing them to apply judgment, creativity and human ingenuity. The upside depends on skills, inclusive design, and responsible governance.
As AI takes on more execution, human value shifts to quality control, critical thinking and accountability. Employers should automate tasks, not whole roles; redesign work around human oversight; and create clear reskilling pathways, especially for entry-level talent. Recognising that the right enterprise response to AI is not workforce reduction as a first instinct, it is workforce redesign, reskilling and human-led oversight.
Othelo Vieira, technical product manager lead at Cloud On Demand
It’s a legitimate concern, and it deserves to be taken seriously rather than dismissed with reassurances about ‘new jobs being created.’ AI will displace certain task categories — repetitive cognitive work, basic data processing, first-level customer service — and this will affect entry-level workers disproportionately. In a country with South Africa’s unemployment rate, that’s not theoretical: it has real consequences. That said, wholesale displacement is not inevitable — it depends on choices that organisations make. The enterprises getting this right are being deliberate about it: they’re redeploying people whose tasks are automated rather than simply reducing headcount, investing in reskilling, and designing AI augmentation strategies where humans and AI work together. Government and business both have a role — skills development programmes, sectoral agreements, and thoughtful deployment timelines matter. The worst outcome is organisations that automate for cost and then walk away from the workforce implications.
Ryan Martyn, co-founder and chief marketing officer of Syntech Distribution
It’s a legitimate concern and shouldn’t be dismissed. The way to guard against it is by keeping humans central to critical thinking and oversight rather than removing them from the loop. Enterprises that invest in reskilling staff to work alongside AI, rather than simply replacing roles, will be better positioned. AI should be treated as a tool that augments judgement, not a replacement for it.
Andre Hogewoning, chief operating officer at Business AI
What we are seeing with our customers is not job elimination — it is job evolution. Entry-level roles are being repurposed at a slightly higher level of complexity and responsibility. That is a fundamentally different story to the one many people fear.
The extent to which AI impacts employment will be determined far more by company culture than by the technology itself. The technology is largely neutral. It is the values, leadership and people philosophy of an organisation that will determine whether AI becomes a tool for human advancement or a mechanism for workforce reduction.
We believe most companies will find themselves able to deliver more with the same resource pool — a dynamic that, while positive for productivity, could over time lead to lower levels of new employment rather than mass retrenchments.
New roles are already emerging, including chief AI officers, AI security engineers, AI developers, AI analysts and AI implementation specialists.